Health Care PSA

By Too Conservative


Comments

  • RichmondDem says:

    The postal service is “big government”? Come again? It was even in the Articles of Confederation for God’s sake!

  • Dan says:

    So, you have another client. Business is good. Congratulations.
    .
    Not only is the Postal Service hardly an example of “big government”, but the video is pretty damned insulting to the hard working folks who work for the postal service. Right down to the wrinkled shirt to make the guy look slovenly. Nice work.
    .
    I see one of your other clients, that criminal Rick Scott, is doing well recently in the polls down in Florida. I guess it is just awful “big government” to pay taxes to take care of sick old folks. But it is perfectly okay for a con man like Rick Scott to then defraud the taxpayers and steal that money. And then use the money he stole from the taxpayers to try to buy the GOP nomination for governor. All the while railing against the very government he stole from.
    .
    They don’t get much slimier than Rick Scott.
    .
    I know you are in business to make a buck, but you may want to consider being a bit more discriminating in the future when it comes to your clientele. You deal with people as covered in shit as Rick Scott and sometimes some of it gets on you. Long term it is probably a sounder business decision to decline the business of criminals.
    .
    Sorry for the rant. The guy just makes me want to puke.
    .
    Please return to the comical anti-government videos making fun of the little people who aren’t so well positioned to steal.

  • Mary Gail Swenson says:

    The “little people” comment got the Swede from BP thoroughly smacked by the press.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Wow, that is stupid on so many levels.

  • Mary Gail Swenson says:

    Eddie, get over yourself. That was a joke. :) The biggest laugh over that was the giant hoohaa the media made out of it. A guy with ESL problems makes a speech and all of a sudden, it’s a major story?

  • edmundburkenator says:

    I’m talking about the vid, MGS. Not your comment.

  • Mary Gail Swenson says:

    Oops. :)

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    Now that the USPS fed-workers are being shaved off, do they get reassinged to healthcare providers? I am thinking former mail carriers could potentially become x-ray technician – or after some low level training – an OGBYN.

  • Dan says:

    No, Loudoun Lady. Priority is being given to fully staffing the Death Panels. So any employees laid off will be directed to Death Panel duty.
    .
    I am interviewing as a Death Panelist next week. We Democrats just love killing grandmas. It is right up there with trying to destroy America and desecrating churches.
    .
    I understand there are points given for prior military service, so I hope the veterans preference puts me over the top. Maybe they’ll assign me to off Senator Grassley or one of the other clowns who went around spouting the most fantastical lies about the bill. At least until (as in Senator Grassley’s case) they started trying to take credit for the stuff in the bill that their constituent’s loved. Then they got amnesia about having gone all out to kill it.
    .
    Actually, ex postal workers might be better doctors than some of the recent Republican crop. We have Dr. Rand Paul who isn’t certified by the American Board of Ophthalmology. He is certified by the National Board of Ophthalmology. A group he created himself! So why shouldn’t ex postal workers be able to certify themselves as obstetricians?
    .
    And who can forget Dr. Frist doing his video diagnosis on the Senate floor? That was classic. And not in his specialty to boot.
    .
    Then there is Tom Coburn who claims the privilege of doctor/patient confidentiality with regards to his discussions with Senator Ensign over paying hush money to cover up an affair and subsequent breaking of lobbying laws. And Coburn is an obstetrician! Treating a man in his fifties??!!??
    .
    Maybe those postal workers are a better bet as obstetricians.
    .
    If I don’t make the Death Panel maybe I can get a job at one of those FEMA concentration camps that the truly unhinged Congresswoman Bachmann is always going on about.
    .
    Republicans say the darnedest things.

  • Loudoun Watcher says:

    Dan, go post in your hat.

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    Dan, Is your wife the most tired woman in the world?

  • Tom Seeman says:

    Actually, Dan, you will need to keep that application open, because it is going to happen. Get your yuks in while you can.
    .
    Oh, they won’t be “death panels” per se, but they’ll have the same effect. It’s called rationing, and they do it now throughout Europe, even if they won’t admit to it.
    .
    When the government controls healthcare, they eventually take a decision that they want to cap health care spending at a certain point, because they don’t want to raise taxes over a certain amount. When they do that services by definition will have to be limited. And decisions will be made that older people are going to die soon anyway, and the cost-benefit radio for their treatments is unfavorable, so some services will be ended.

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    Not to mention the quality of life issues – need a new hip and can’t walk? Wait 18 months and live in pain, and hopefully you will pass on before they can install the new hip. $avings galore.

  • RichmondDem says:

    We could listen to LL’s gut, or we could listen to an actual scientific survey that asks real people about the quality of their nation’s health care systems:

    http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/Fund-Reports/2010/Jun/Mirror-Mirror-Update.aspx

    In “timeliness of care” we’re #5 out of 7.

  • RichmondDem says:

    Tom–
    .
    We already have rationing–it’s just done according to how much money you have. Which is fine if we’re talking abut flat-screen TVs or cars or leather sofas, not so much when it comes to healthcare, or education or (on some level) food for that matter.

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    My gut says I am:
    *
    1. Hungry
    *
    2. If we took care of the illegal problem we’d be able to improve availability – as it stands everyone gets emergency treatments despite of insurance or legal status. We (those with insurance and tax payers)subsidize emergency care in the 100′s of billions of dollars. Seems like a nice chunk to put towards improving our current condition.
    *
    3. wondering why everyone comes to the US if the care is soooo poor, like those wiley Canadians that run out of space, bed, surgeons, etc…..

  • Cato the Elder says:

    “or education”
    *
    Whoa chief. Higher education is available to everyone, it just depends on what you’re willing to do for it. (Longer ago than I would prefer to remember) I had to commit to the military to get an edumacation. What’s wrong with requiring people to put out for self improvement?
    *
    As for food, please provide us with the latest statistics on deaths caused by starvation in the United States.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    I won’t try to speak on behalf of RD, but I would imagine his talking about something called “food deserts”. No one starves, but there are places in our country where is it very difficult to get a nutritious meal or be able to purchase things to prepare a nutritious meal.

  • RichmondDem says:

    Cato–
    .
    Yeah, starvation and malnutrition has pretty much been eliminated–thanks to food stamps, federal agricultural policy, and other things you hate. This is a common theme of conservatism–pointing to a problem that’s been solved, while forgetting it was liberal programs that solved them. See: Rand Paul and the Civil Rights Act.
    .
    “NOBODY would make a “whites only restaurant today! People would think that’s horrible!”. Yeah, idiot, because of the Civil Rights Act!

  • RichmondDem says:

    As for higher education, ever hear of the Higher Education Act of 1965? It transformed higher education from the domain of the wealthy and upper middle class and opened it to just about everyone who had the ability and intelligence required for it.
    .
    Just goes to prove once again that most Republicans, like their party mascot, can only narrowly see in front of them.

  • Cato the Elder says:

    “pointing to a problem that’s been solved”
    *
    You brought it up wingnut, not me. Shorter RD: rationing based on money is evil, but rationing done by government apparatchiks whom enforce their decisions using coersion is just spiffy, because everyone who works for the government is kind and benevolent.
    *
    What size jackboots are you wearing these days, anyhow?

  • Loudoun Watcher says:

    Here are the statistics on the votes for the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The misconception that DEMOCRATS passed this legislation is so wrong. But Dems have managed to hijack the credit,along with so many other issues, and try to paint the Republican Party as evil.

    The original House version:[10]
    Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
    Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)

    Cloture in the Senate:[11]
    Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%-34%)
    Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)

    The Senate version:[10]
    Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
    Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)

    The Senate version, voted on by the House:[10]
    Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
    Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)

  • Cato the Elder says:

    “ever hear of the Higher Education Act of 1965″
    *
    Oh, and next time you want to crow about a government program I’d suggest you try and find one that actually worked to use as an example. In the late 60s and early 70s college degree attainment was 31%. Today it’s 32%.
    *
    Of course, none of you so-called progressive douches want to be judged on results. It’s the thought that counts, right?

  • RichmondDem says:

    LW–break it down by non-southern Republicans vs. non-southern Democrats. The Dixiecrats were a third party in all but name after 1948, and of course were later folded into the Republican Party in the 70s. The Republicans used to be the party of a strong central government–Lincoln and T.R.’s role models were Hamilton and Clay, not Jefferson and Jackson. There were still some of those old Republicans left in the early ’60s.
    .
    The GOP nominee in 1964, who voted against the Act, swept the deep south where opposition was the strongest. The only place outside his home state he won. Coincidence, I’m sure.
    .

  • RichmondDem says:

    Cato:
    .
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/03/Educational_attainment.jpg
    .
    What the hell are you talking about? It’s been rising steadily, and it it’s been rising faster after after the act was implemented.

  • Cato the Elder says:

    First, there’s a little disparity in the data. See: http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=rationing_college_opportunity
    *
    Second, I love pretty graphs, but I don’t see the same pattern you see. Looking at the 25-29 line there’s a lot more noise in the graph, and I’m going to go out on a limb and say that those spikes upward roughly correspond to when our 25-29 year olds would have been coming home from our various wars. The 25 years and over line is unremarkable other than the fact that the slope shifts slightly higher in about 1976, eleven years after your beloved legislation passed. Looking at the slope of the line I don’t see how you can make an argument that your program had much effect, whatsoever. Why doesn’t that line look like a hockey stick after 1965?
    *
    And that’s the crux of the problem with you libs. Your governance policies are designed to make you feel good about yourselves, not achieve results. That graph you posted could not have been more damning to your argument, in that it’s a clear continuation of a trend that started in 1945, and your Great Society programs produced no discernible positive divergence of the slope.

  • RichmondDem says:

    “Why doesn’t that line look like a hockey stick after 1965?”.
    .
    Because you don’t set up a program in one year, much less earn a Bachelor’s Degree in a year.

  • Cato the Elder says:

    Ok, I’ll bite. So why doesn’t it look like a hockey stick in 1990, after we’ve had a full 25 years to experience all the goodness of your historic legislation?

  • RichmondDem says:

    Did I ever claim it should look like a hockey stick? You seem to be the only one who thinks it should. I think it’s a success because the percentage of people who have Bachelor’s degrees has gone up at a faster rate than before the act, which you disputed. When I proved you wrong with actual data, you moved to goal posts to “but it’s not a hockey stick!” So what? It’s going up at a faster rate than it was before 1965, which was the idea. And it started moving the fastest around the mid-70s, exactly when the act should have been kicking in fully.
    .

  • Cato the Elder says:

    “proved you wrong with actual data”
    *
    You’re delusional. You’re also assuming correlation = causation. Here’s an alternate theory for you Che, and one that fits the timelines a lot better than yours does.
    *
    http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?&chart_type=line&graph_id=&category_id=&recession_bars=On&width=630&height=378&bgcolor=%23B3CDE7&graph_bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&txtcolor=%23000000&ts=8&preserve_ratio=true&fo=ve&id=W209RC1&transformation=lin&scale=Left&range=Max&cosd=1959-01-01&coed=2010-04-01&line_color=%230000FF&link_values=&mark_type=NONE&mw=4&line_style=Solid&lw=1&vintage_date=2010-06-26&revision_date=2010-06-26&mma=0&nd=&ost=&oet=&fml=a
    *
    That’s compensation received by employees. Notice how the slope starts to rise parabolically, oh, around the mid 1970s? Yeah.

  • Loudoun Watcher says:

    Barry Goldwater opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act on property rights values, not racism or desire for segregation. He was a purist in the sense that owners of businesses should have the basic right to refuse service.

    The plain fact is that the REPUBLICANS made the Act a reality, not the Democrats. Sift the votes by region however you want, the end result stands.

  • RichmondDem says:

    I don’t care for what reason he opposed it, the end result is the same. If someone who opposed the Civil Rights Act had been President in 1964–whether done out of an ideological blind spot like Goldwater (or Rand Paul) or pure, racist malice like Strom Thurmond, the end result would have been the same. Jim Crow wold have survived much longer than it did.
    .
    And now, in 2010, there’s only one major party who has nominated for the US Senate someone who questions the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and it’s not the Democratic Party.

  • Montana says:

    You gotta love all the conservatives in Kentucky who voted for Rand Paul and brought him to national exposure, priceless. Lets face it they will try to vote this liar in but we can only wait and see if there is other skeltons in hs closet, oh yeah he is not a racist, I repeat, he is not a racist. Great thing is we are talking about Kentucky, so being a racist maybe a positive, wee will see. Yee Haw!

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Hmm… Goldwater thought the CRA was constitutional and needed to be revised. I don’t think he was “ideological” about his decision.
    .
    Was WWII a government program? The Marshall Plan?

  • edmundburkenator says:

    UN-constitutional, I should say after a reread.

  • Cato the Elder says:

    RE: Karen Davis and the Commonwealth fund being a legitimate source of a “scientific” survey RCP has suggested an alternate headline: “Liberal think tank, headed by single-payer advocate, ObamaCare activist, and former Carter official, says America has worst health care.”
    *
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/06/29/if_you_believe_america_has_lousy_health_care_heres_why__106136.html

Leave Comment